[meteorite-list] They're Leprechauns!

From: Phil Whitmer <prairiecactus_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 21:06:03 -0400
Message-ID: <D750AD29FA6C48B98804DD4C6766151B_at_whitmerjbqtim1>

Sterling, Listerians, Friends, Countrymen, Pleiadians:

The problem I have with the cosmological principle is that it's a tenet in a
belief system (theoretical astrophysics) that I don't necessarily adhere to.
E.g., I don't believe in multiple alternative copies of the Universe, Heaven
or Hell, but I do believe in Bizzaro World (Htrae). (Go figure!) Like all
the ancient creation myths, a strong CP can't be proved or disproved at this
time. You'd have the same problem proving or disproving the Upanishads.
Materialism can't explain everything and neither can mythic stories.

Einstein wasn't infallible, otherwise he'd be known as Pope Albert.
(Cosmological Constant, OOps, nevermind.) When St. Albert made a mistake, he
changed his tune when presented with the proper infra red evidence. In that
spirit, I'll change my mind in an instant when presented with some evidence
of life off Earth.

You really seem enamored of the Cosmological Principle (all kneel), as if
it's Holy Writ. It's really nothing more than a working hypothesis, hardly a
proof of anything. Certainly not a proof of multicellular intelligent life
out there.

You are right about the mediocrity of Galileo, Newton, et al., their
theories were worked out by the Persians and Arabs centuries earlier. Like
Newton discovered gravity! What's next, Columbus discovered America?

When it comes to systems of belief, you can choose the right wing of
materialism, the left wing of religion or take the middle of the road and
keep an open mind and see what develops. I'm sure the Hubble will get a
visible light shot of a Pleiadian spacecraft in the next few years before
it conks out.

Thanks and a tip of the tinfoil hat,

Phil Whitmer




 Hi, Phil, List,

You're forgetting the "Assumption of Mediocrity."
This is also referred to as the "strong" Cosmological
Principle, which is "The universe, observed from
every point, in every direction, and every time,
looks the same." The Strong CP developed in the
20th Century from the Weak CP of Copernicus,
which is that the Universe, observed from any
planet, looks the same.

We ARE Mediocre, say Copernicus (and Kepler
and Galileo and Newton, Bruno, Kant, Hubble,
Einstein, and...), just one more lousy star, nothing
special about us, not a preferred location in any
way. This was a revolutionary idea, virtually never
expressed before by humans. Historically, we've always
thought of ourselves as the Center and the Purpose
and the Most Magnificent Thing in the whole Universe!
(As well as being the sole focus and single-minded
obsession of the Divinity and/or Divinities).

The Strong CP is not merely a shift in attitude. It
produces (and predicts) significant scientific results,
at least in cosmology in the historical sense and
astronomy in the observational sense. If you want
a nice quick set of flash cards, go to:
http://www.slideshare.net/millerco/a1-24-the-big-bang

The "Life" Question is an obvious application of the
Strong CP -- "The universe, observed from this point, in
all the directions we can see, and in every time frame,
looks and IS the same, including life." For 560 years,
every major discovery about the Universe has been
predicted by the Strong CP or ended up confirming
the Strong CP.

The reason it's called a "Principle" and not a Law, not
a Proof, in that it is an extreme generalization over a
very broad regime, a vast spread of data, the broadest
possible range of data -- ALL of it. So, there are stars
younger and older than ours, bigger and smaller, hotter
and colder, with some planets, with no planets, with a
gob of planets, one asteroid zone, five asteroid zones,
and the same for Jupiters and all the other types of
planets we can conceive, and some we can't. But it's a
VERY finite array of possibilities, encompassing a VERY
small number on the scale of the Universe. And we are
talking about the ENTIRE Universe here.

For the Universe, as a WHOLE, the Strong CP IS strong.
You can bet against it, on the grounds of "No Proof" but,
if so, I know a lot of casino operators who want you as a
client. Betting against the Strong CP is betting Against
The House.

Just keep playing; I'll go get you another free drink...


Sterling K. Webb
Received on Thu 10 Sep 2009 09:06:03 PM PDT